fca767 From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2006, 1786 posts, RR: 1
Reply 4, posted (5 years 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 2275 times:
We could just say "Stop" and it would stop....then start again...At the end of the day, they resources are still there to be farmed, all it would take is volunteers, in exchange for food, water housing etc.
We'll always have the machinery to make things, though oil will go, we've got solar etc.
propilot83 From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 606 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (5 years 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 2131 times:
This is very interesting, because I always wondered "where does money come from," they cant just print it hot off the press, I mean not all the time you know, it would cause a deficit in GDP. Also some people were saying during the bailouts "well how come Congress wont just give everyone a million or a billion dollars a piece, then everything would be alright." Oh no I didnt think so, common sense would tell you that giving every living person or family a million or a billion dollars would cause demand to go so high, that supply would literally fall into the depths. We would run out of oil in a blink of an eye.
Thank you for the answer! I will try to read more about the IMF on wiki for starters.
Quoting propilot83 (Reply 7): This is very interesting, because I always wondered "where does money come from," they cant just print it hot off the press, I mean not all the time you know, it would cause a deficit in GDP.
Same here. I thought the US borrowed all its money from China.. but then again, where would China get all this money from?
And then seeing that China is having a growing debt as well, I didn't understand anything anymore
Ken777 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 8733 posts, RR: 9
Reply 9, posted (5 years 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 2062 times:
it's interesting to look at it for a while, but it seems both the black and red numbers are totally dependent on Confidence.
At this time I think that Confidence is a big risk. Congress just "declined" to extend unemployment benefits, which had some important funding for states as well. That's going to take billions out of the economy, boost foreclosures, increase those without health insurance(or increase Medicaid), etc.
It also, I believe, is going to risk and expansion of the recession.
There is an editorial in the NY Times today. While I don't agree with all of it I do agree with:
Quote: Deficits matter, but not more than economic recovery, and not more urgently than the economic survival of millions of Americans. A sane approach would couple near-term federal spending with a credible plan for deficit reduction — a mix of tax increases and spending cuts — as the economic recovery takes hold.
Neither the Republicans nor the Tea Party would agree with this, and both will gain strength in the November elections. I can therefore see some major problems next year when the hard right gets more power.
It seems unlikely that any nation would ever demand the debt to be repaid. Doing so would cause huge problems in the US economy, which in turn would probably cause huge problems in their economy. People like to talk about potential economic armageddon if China wants to be repaid, but often forget that doing that would destroy one of China's biggest export markets.
Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
Quantitative easing wouldn't be the answer - funny though it may sound, you can't simply print money when you've got none left. The amount that the US would need in the situation you describe would lead to hyperinflation. I don't think that needs further explanation.